You know this CC, don’t you? Just a common El-Camino, nothing too special. But reading William Stopford’s recent outtake on the Aussie El-Camino, I was reminded of this post I wanted to do for a long time concerning the El-Caminos that were sold in Israel back in their day, and featured an extended cab unlike anywhere else in the world (to the best of my knowledge). This was a case of Israeli ingenuity which originated from expensive cars- and tight pockets…

Cars in Israel had always cost dearly. Right at the beginning of the country in 1949, the government considered those who had cars to be, well, rich. Cars back then were viewed as luxury and not necessity. So they were taxed at about 90% Purchase Tax (!). This has shifted throughout the years, depending on engine size, vehicle size and other criteria but remained mostly the same. You therefore understand any tax exemptions Joe-public could mount on his vehicle were gladly received- and actively sought after, as you’ll see.

From the mid Seventies, extensive tax exemptions were beset upon pickup trucks. Owners of these vehicles (mostly self-employed people who owned small and medium-sized businesses) were eligible for tax credit on purchase and maintenance of these pickups, and thus pay less income tax.

The El-Camino, which was a very comfortable pickup (after all, it was based on a sedan), was well equipped (it was automatic, had power steering and air-conditioning) and had a relatively powerful engine, suddenly became very popular. It was much better than the other pickups on the market.

But it had a problem; the sitting arraignment was of course one (driver) + two (passengers). Obviously the El-Camino was not built to carry a family. So a modification was engineered: remove the rear window and partition (between the bed and cabin), cover the bed with a fiber canopy, install a rear bench and get a… station wagon complete with tax credits.

This, of course, hasn’t escaped the Tax authorities, which were not amused, as they say. So an ingenious solution had been devised: Once again the rear window and partition were removed and a fiber canopy added, but this time it was extended only enough to add a (narrow) rear bench to create a “double cabin” El-Camino. Using the original rear window to neatly finish off the conversion was also cleaver, as it just about looked like an option from the factory.

This was as best as you could get- drive in an American car AND screw the IRS over. What could be better?

As you can see, This started with the Chevelle-based El-Camino (Mk 4). Try as I might, I couldn’t find any photos of the early Station-Wagon setup. They’re probably all dead by now.

Specifically, this is of course a GMC Sprint, but you get the idea.

Note that they even installed quarter windows for the rear passengers.

When the next generation, Malibu-based El-Camino arrived, it was even more successful in Israel- as was the Malibu itself. Many Pickups “escaped” the conversion, because with or without it, the tax exempt still applied:

This one and the El-Camino above it are largely unmolested examples, original late Seventies’ cars.

And here’s a converted El-Camino, freshly painted, of course. Note this one has no quarter windows.

But this one does, and boasts vinyl! Shoddy workmanship aside, you could almost convince yourself that it’s a factory option. This is from Google and the only photo that’s not mine, but I wanted you to see one example of a conversion from the back.

Here’s another restored car, from a profile view that shows the “double cabin effect” best.

Same car, different time (and updated graphics by the owner).

All this lasted until the mid-Eighties, when the Tax authorities canceled the tax exemption on the El-Camino and the likes. The local dealer decided to cease from importing it, and so this “era” came to an end. Tax credits were still applied to other commercial vehicles, but this time very small pickups and vans, mostly European (such as VW Caddy or Fiat Fiorino) and no conversions or modifications were allowed.

Nowadays, the El-Camino is highly regarded among the Israeli classic car collectors. From the workhorse that it was in the Seventies and Eighties, it’s now considered to be a basis for improvements, if not full-on customization. Cars that are most sought after are ones without the aforementioned conversion, because in all honesty, original “single cabin” El-Caminos look- and are built- much better than converted ones. Also, once it’s a classic car (and with no tax exemptions), you have no need for back seats.

I’ll leave you with three more examples of typically preserved/ restored cars. Unconverted, of course:

It applies not only to the Ridgeline, but to all four-door, short bed trucks, for that matter.

But I’m not sure how many “folks are saying” that, if the sales numbers are any indication. I’ve long since resigned myself to the fact that my preference for a 6-foot or longer truck bed puts me in the minority of today’s pickup buyers.

It’s a minority, but a sizable one. Customers wanted a four-door cab with a decent sized bed, and the manufacturers listened. Except for the Toyota Tundra, every half-ton pickup now has a crew cab with a longer-than-6-foot bed available.

“Except for the Toyota Tundra, every half-ton pickup now has a crew cab with a longer-than-6-foot bed available.”

I’ve noticed that as I’ve kept an eye out for something to possibly replace my Ranger. My only concern is, how much longer will that be the case? One of the local Nissan dealers has a nice Frontier in that configuration, but given that I keep a truck for 10 to 15 years, I’d rather wait until the redesigned one appears. And it wouldn’t surprise me if the crew cab/long bed combination disappears.

Which is why I’m also considering a small SUV or crossover with a 4’x8′ folding trailer. It would work for most or all of the things I actually use the truck bed for.

Drzhivago138

Posted July 2, 2016 at 10:28 PM

Oh, now we’re talking about midsizers? Okay, awesome! Notice that the extended wheelbase crew cab/6′ bed models from Chevy/GMC, Toyota, and Nissan don’t actually have counterparts overseas. If you buy a Chevy/Holden Colorado, Toyota Hilux, or Nissan Navara elsewhere in the world, it’s one wheelbase or nothing. The long wheelbase versions are a uniquely North American phenomenon (and something tells me the upcoming NA Ranger will be like this too).

I only bring this up because it means, at least IMO, that the CCLB midsize pickup won’t be going away anytime soon. CAFE regs mean that a longer WB is actually favored for meeting MPG targets. Nissan was also the first to offer a crew cab/6′ bed model on the 2001 Frontier, some 4 years before Toyota and over 10 years before the second-gen Colorado/Canyon, so I can’t see them giving it up anytime soon. A crew cab/6′ bed midsizer is almost as long as a standard full-size pickup, but noticeably lower and narrower, which gives it an advantage in certain conditions.

You are correct that an SUV/CUV with a trailer would meet needs just as well if not better in some cases. The attraction of the pickup truck, then, is mostly that it’s one vehicle with nothing to worry about behind.

One, there’s no way of knowing what any one vehicle spends its time doing, unless you follow the owner around with a stopwatch. Two, it’s not that different from a baby boomer who owns a Corvette and never takes it above 65 MPH. Three, why do we care what other people do with their money, as long as it’s not harming us?

Frank

Posted July 3, 2016 at 3:16 PM

It’s easy to know what an entire class of vehicles is up to- empty on the side streets, empty on the highways, empty in the work parking lots, empty at retail establishments…

And it is hurting the rest of us even though you can’t fathom it.

Drzhivago138

Posted July 3, 2016 at 10:24 PM

How is it hurting the rest of “us” any more than a supercar that’s never taken onto a track or a minivan that never hauls more than 4 people? Why must it be an us vs. them issue?

I had a ’79 GMC version in 1986 for a short time. 305, automatic, AC. Would have kept it, but would have meant selling my ’70 C10 and at the time I needed something that could tow good size RV’s, so would up reselling it. It had a crazy tall rear axle ratio and was a dog around town, but was decent on gas for a V8, especially on the highway and the typical GM frosty cold AC and power steering were things my truck lacked and appreciated by me.

Had no idea these were so popular in Israel, at those high tax rates I can see why. The final generations were a nice looking body style and the smaller size to previous version was a plus as well.

The Plymouth Valiant/Dodge Dart were the best selling US-made cars in Israel at one point. They were the cars for ministers, lawyers, generals and respectable heads of industry back then; however the prime minister always had a bigger Mopar product like a Polara or a Fury.

Have you considered writing a “Mopars and other American cars of famous Israelis” article? I have been interested in this very subject for a long time but have seen only fragmentary information about it, and no photos until now.

In my experience, photographs of this kind of subject usually end up in archives where “car people” never see them (e.g. the Harvard Israel Archives), so only luck gets the information and photographs published years later. I have a couple of subjects along these lines that I am considering writing up now, after finding photographs in archives unexpectedly while researching other subjects.

Simply because Chrysler Corp was very well represented on the market (also on light truck level) and even assembled cars and trucks in Upper Nazareth. Mopars back then also had a well earned reputation for being the most reliable of all US manufacturers, a very important consideration in Israel, where until the 80s conditions could be primitive and spares expensive. Later the administration started to move to Europeans such as Volvo; the PM and President were US-equipped until the early 2000s (Cadillacs this time). Recently there has been a move to Audis and MBs of all manufacturers, unthinkable in earlier days when the memory of WWII was still fresh in the minds of most people.

If Sterling Archer ever goes to Israel, an Israeli double cabin El Camino will have to be the vehicle for his adventures! (Substitute sand for the snow in this screenshot.)

The El Camino was always a very useful vehicle that, along with the Ford Ranchero, suffered from being neither a car nor a truck, and therefore a compromise that interested only a small part of the US auto market. It’s interesting to see how tax breaks served as a “tiebreaker” that nudged the El Camino into mainstream popularity in Israel’s auto market.

The shape of the roofline on the Sprint (73-77) would have made the 2 and 4 doors cars look a lot better than what was offered on the Chevelle and its corporate cousins. It resembles the roofline on the Cutlass Supreme, Regal, Grand Prix, and Monte Carlo, and would have made the Chevelle, LeMans, Century and Cutlass better looking cars of that era.

with the high tax rate, I am really surprised at the sheer number of American cars that we see in your pictures. are these ones that have been imported later in life or were there enough well-to-do Israelis that wanted their north American iron no matter the cost?

Some are later personal imports but all through to the 80s the luxury end of the market was controlled by US manufacturers. Back then, a Mercedes Benz was for an eccentric doctor from a German extract, Jaguars were not imported on a regular basis and the only Japanese cars we had were Subarus and Hino Contessas.

Interesting the way people of other nations get around their tax laws. Great feature, Yohai.

My ’84 Suzuki Swift was imported with only two seats as a commercial van, with a payload sticker in the rear hatch area, and the rear seat was listed as a dealer-installed option (they all seemed to have it). IIRC that was to get around Australian import quotas. Regardless, it’s still registered as a van 32 years later!

In Germany, we have similar tax scheme for personal and work use. If the owner removes the rear seat, install whatever material to make ‘flat’ flooring, and covers the rear side windows, he could claim his estate or hatchback vehicle as business use.

I saw one Ford Taurus (yes, that aero jellybean from the US) configured this way. I managed to catch up with the owner. He told me he bought it on the cheap from the US military personnel.

Funny this should come up now. There is an ’80 El Camino currently on eBay here in the US, which has been modified by removing the rear window and bulkhead entirely, and then a cap was placed over the bed to make it weather-tight. So now you have a full pass through between the passenger cabin and the bed area (into which the owner placed a mattress to make it into, umm, a bed). It’s an interesting vehicle but my concern is whether taking out the rear bulkhead would impair the structural rigidity of the body.

Very ingenious scheme. I wonder why the later ones didn’t have the quarter windows fitted to the colonnade-based models? Not only would it have been more pleasant for the passengers, but rearward visibility would have also been impaired with those wide blank sections.